E 



/ 

I 

I 



BRIEF DIGEST 



AND 



INDEX 



OF 



3 Various Annexations of Foreign 
Territory made by the United 
States of America. 



PREPARED BY 

WILLIAM R. CASTLE 

OF THE HAWAIIAN BAR, WHILE HAWAIIAN MINISTER IN WASHINGTON, IN THE YEAR I 895. 



Published by the Annexation Club of Honolulu, Hawail 



WASHINGTON, D. C. : 

Gibson Bros., Printers and Bookbinders. 

1897. 



BRIEF DIGEST 



AND 



INDEX 



OF 



The Various Annexations of Foreign 

Territory made by tlie United 

States of America. 



PREPARED BY 

WILLIAM R. CASTLE 

OF THE HAWAIIAN BAR, WHILE HAWAIIAN MINISTER IN WASHINGTON, IN THE YEAR 1895. 



Published by the Annexation Club of Honolulu, Hawaii. 



WASHINGTON, D. C. I 

Gibson Bros., Printers and Bookbinders. 

1897. 



Jz. 



INDEX. 



A. 

Al.oska, annexation of 15 

Adams, J. Q., views on constitutionality of annexation 4 

Admission to Union, Florida 7 

Louisiana 1 

Texas 11 

Constitutionality discussed 2-5, 11 

" by treaty " 4,5 

Annexation of Alaska 15 

Florida 7 

Louisiana 1 

Texas 11 

by joint resolution, Texas, etc 12 

treaty or purchase 1, 11 

effect of on rights of people 1, 8, 15 

treaty stipulations regarding Union 1,8 

authority of U. S. Government for 1-5,7 

of entire country or colony 11 

B. 

Benton, views on Texas case 12 

Breckenridge. Annexation constitutional 4 

C. 

Canter, Am. Ins. Co., v., decided constitutionality 11 

Citizens of annexed territorj% rights of 1, 3, 8, 11, 15 

Consent of inhabitants not necessary 12 

Constitutionalitj' of annexation of foreign territory 2-5, 11 

by resolution, discussion on 12, 13, 14 

treaty, " 2,4,11,13 

settled— refers to 1787.... 11 

F. 

Federalists, strict construction by 2 

Florida, Annexation 7-11 

Secret act and resolution to seize 8 

Treaty of cession of 1819 8 

Rights of inhabitants under 8 

Act authorizing President to provide government, &c 9 

Act for territorial government 9 

Old laws to continue 9 

Act extending U. S. laws to, &c 9 

Legislative power as territory 9 

Admission as State, &c 10 

G. 

Gallatin, views on constitutionality of annexation ,. 2 

Government of annexed territory, temporary 3, 4,5, 8 

Acts for 5, 9 

As full territories 5, 9 

By extending laws of U. S. to 5, 9, 14 

By legislative council 5, 9 

Griswald, of N. Y., denies constitutionality of annexation : 3 

Griswald, R., admits constitutioualitj' of annexation 3 

but must hold as colony 3 

Guadalupe Hidalgo, treaty of 15 

1. 
Inhabitants, <fec. (See Citizens.) 

J. 

Jackson, Genl. And. Acts regarding Florida 8,9 

Jefferson, Thos. Views on constitutionality of annexation 2, 3 

Joint resolution, re Texas 13 

Judicial decisions on anne.xation, &c 10, 11 

Judicial power in annexed territory 

L. 

Laws of U. S. extended to annexed territory 5, 9, 14 

annexed territory to stand till, Ac. 5,6,9 

Legislative council for annexed territory 5, 9 



Liucolu, Atty. Genl. Views on constitutionality of annexation 2 

Livingstone, Kobt., negotiates Louisiana cession 1 

Louisiana, annexation, &c 1-7 

Treaty of cession ' 1 

Constitutionality of annexation .• 2-5 

Inhabitants, rights of 1 

Acts relative to, authorizes possession 5 

Temporary government 5 

Extend lavrs of U. S. to 5 

Legislative council of 5 

Laws remaining in force 6 

Election to legislature of 7 

Registration of vessels of France 5 

Dividing territory 5 

Conditions for Statehood 7 

Admission as State, acts for 7 

M. 

Madison doubts constitutionality of annexation 2 

Marshal, Chief J., opinion on constitutionality 11 

Mexican War arose from Texas affairs 11, 15 

N. 

Nicholas, W. C, on constitutionality of annexation 2,4 

Nicholson on constitutionality of annexation 3 

O. 

Orleans, Territory of — carved from Louisiana 5 

Act for territorial government of 5 

1*. 

Pickering admits constitutionality of annexation, but doubts status 4 

President negotiates treaties of annexation, &c 1, 8, 15 

temporary government of annexed territory by 3, 4, 5, 8 

K. 

Randolph, J., views on constitutionality of annexation 3 

Ratification... 2, 8, 9 

Registration of vessels of annexed (La.) territory 5 

Resolutions ?'^ annexation of Texas 13 

Rodney, views on constitutionality of annexation 3 

S. 

Supreme Court holds annexation constitutional 11 

Statehood 5, 7. 10. 13 

Status of annexed territory 5, 9, 10 

T. 

Taylor, views on constitutionality of annexation 4 

annexed territory to be held as colony 4 

Temporary government of annexed territory 3, 4, 5, 8 

Florida 8 

Louisiana , 5 

Territorial government, annexed territory provided with 5, 6, 9 

Texas 11 15 

Republic established , 12 

applies for annexation 12 

treaty of, rejected 12 

joint resolution for annexation 12, 13 

discussion of 14 

laws of U. S. extended to 14 

debt of, paid by U. S 15 

treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo 15 

statutes to perfect annexation 14, 15 

Tracy admits right to annex territory 4 

denies right of Art. 3, cession of Louisiana 4 

Treaty for annexation of Alaska 15 

Texas defeated 12 

cession of Florida 8 

Louisiana 1 

Guadalupe Hidalgo 15 

San Hdefonso, &c 1 

annexation may be by 1, 8, 11, 15 

provision in, for admission to Union 1, 8 

may establish certain rights 1, 8, 11 

Tyler, President, urges annexation of Texas 12 



D la K S T . 

The Various Annexations Made by the 
United States of America. 



It is the purpose iu this digest to consider only the matter of the an- 
nexation of territory to the United States ; how and Avhen it occurred ; 
the methods used to perfect union with the other States, and certain 
views which arose and were expressed upon the constitutionaHty of the 
matter, in Congress and elsewhere. 



Louisiana. 

In 1803 Robert R. Livingston was in Paris attempting to negotiate for 
the cession of New Orleans, Florida, etc. ; but his efforts were unsuccess- 
ful until the First Consul, Naj^oleon, suddenly decided, for reasons which 
are not yet definitely known, to dispose of the entire territory, which had 
just been acquired from Spain by the treaty of San Ildefonso. (II H. 
Adams' History, p. 42.) It was probably to prevent the occupation by 
England and consequent loss of all. 

At the request of Jefferson, Congress had appropriated two millions of 
dollars to be used for the purchase of New Orleans and such territory as 
might be acquired, and Monroe was sent to join Pinckney and Living- 
ston. (II Schouler's U. S. History, 46.) 

The Government and many citizens of the United States desired the 
annexation of the Louisiana and Florida territories, and Jefferson un- 
questionably depended upon that desire for the ratification of acts which 
he deemed to be outside of the Constitution. His correspondence with 
friends and members of his own Cabinet clearly indicate this to be his 
opinion; but most, if not all, his Cabinet and friends with whom he cor- 
responded held different opinions, and declined to support the Presi- 
dent's views. 

Napoleon deputed to Marbois the task of selling Louisiana to the rep- 
resentatives of the United States. He wanted 100,000,000 francs, but 
after some negotiation 80,000,000 was finally settled upon, which amounted 
to $11,250,000, to be paid to France, and $3,750,000 for the payment by 
France and Spain of claims of citizens of the United States. A treaty 
was negotiated and signed by the contracting parties in Paris, and was 
then referred for ratification to Washington. (II H. Adams' History, p. 

The terms of this treaty are of no special importance for the purpose 
of this review, except Art. 3, which provides as follows : 

" Art. 3. The inhabitants of the ceded territory shall be incorporated 
'' in the Union of the United States, and admitted as soon as possible, 
i' according to the principles of the Federal Constitution, to the enjoy- 



2 LOUISIANA. 

" ment of all the rights, advantages, and immunities of citizens of the 
" United States, and in the meantime they shall be maintained and pro- 
" tected in the free enjoyment of their liberty, property, and the religion 
" which they profess." 

It should be noted that this clause was inserted in direct opposition to 
the views of Madison upon the subject, but it was insisted upon by 
Napoleon. (II H. Adams' History, p. 45.) 

Views on the Constitutionality of the Questioi^. 

The strong popular desire for the acquisition of this territory, and the 
great and overwhelming joy at the successful and satisfactory negotiations, 
may perhaps have had something to do with burying forever the views of 
strict construction which were held by Jefferson and many others, chiefly 
Federalists, at that time. Most of the statesmen in the New England 
States were fearful of the everwhelming influence which would be ob- 
tained by the southern and southwestern portion of the country, and very 
strongly opposed the ratification of the treaty on the ground of its un- 
constitutionality. In the Cabinet, Attorney-General Lincoln expressed 
grave doubts (II H. Adams' History, p. 78), but these doubts and the 
whole subject were ably treated by Gallatin in his letter to Jefferson. It 
was the opinion of some statesmen that separate States could acquire 
territory. Touching upon this, Gallatin says : " If the acquisition of terri- 
" tory is not warranted by the Constitution, it is not more legal to acquire 
" for one State than for the United States. What could, on this construc- 
" tion, prevent the President and Senate, by treaty, annexing Cuba to 
" Massachusetts, or Bengal to Rhode Island, if ever the acquirement of 
" colonies should become a favorite subject Avith governments, and colonies 
" should be acquired ? But does any constitutional objection really exist "? 
" To me it would appear (1) that the United States, as a nation, have an 
" inherent right to acquire territory ; (2) that whenever that acquisition is 
" by treaty, the same constituted authorities in whom the treaty-making 
" power is vested have a constitutional right to sanction the acquisition." 
(I Gallatin's Works, 112.) 

The contention on the part of Madison, Jefferson, and others of the 
strict constructionists had been that any act of the United States as a 
nation had noinherent authority or validity, and must be wholly void (II H. 
Adams, 79-80), and it was expressly understood and maintained by them 
that negotiations for the purchase of New Orleans must, in order to en- 
sure their validity, be sanctioned by the States in the form of an amend- 
ment to the Constitution. {Id.) But, overriding his opinions, Jefferson 
had already directed his envoy in Paris to make a positive treaty, and to 
get both New Orleans and Florida. {Id. 81.) After what had been done, 
as if to reconcile his theory and acts, Jefferson prepared and submitted 
to his Cabinet a long constitutional amendment on the matter. This 
they courteously received and politely dropped from sight. {Id. 83 ; I 
Gal. Works, 127 ; Jeflerson MSS., title Amendment to the Constitution.) 
(See also letter of K. Smith to Jefferson.) Jefferson's attempts to pre 
serve his position on ^he Constitution were coldly received by his sup- 
porters, and one of the strongest of them, Wilson Carey Nicholas (the 
author of the Virginia Resolutions), wrote a letter to Jefferson upon the 
subject, in which he says : " Upon an examination of the Constitution I 
" find the power as broad as it could well be made (Sec. 3, Art. 4), except 
" that new States cannot be formed out of the old ones without the con- 
" sent of the State to be dismembered, and the excejDtion is a proof to 
" my mind that it was not intended to confine Congress in the admission 



LOUISIANA. 6 

" of new States to what was then the territory of the United States. Nor 
" do I see anything in the Constitution that limits the treaty -making 
" power, excei^t the general limitation of the other powers given to the 
" Government, and the evident object for which the Government was in- 
" stituted." (II H. Adams, 87.) 

The treaty for the purchase and the annexation of Louisiana gave a fatal 
wovmd to strict construction of the Constitution on that point. {Jd. 90.) 
Congress was called in session to act upon the matter, and, in his message, 
Jefferson, in sj)ite of his opinions on the constitutional question, called 
upon the " wisdom of Congress * * * to take those measures neces- 
" sary to occupy and govern the annexed territory, and for its incorpora- 
" tion into the Union." 

Several days of earnest discussion arose upon the constitutionality of 
the proposed annexation. 

Said Griswold of New York : " The framers of the Constitution carried 
" their ideas to the time when there might be an extended population, but 
" they did not carry them forward to the time when an addition might be 
" made to the Union of a territory equal to the whole United States, which 
" additional territory might overbalance the exisiting territory, and thereby 
" the rights of the present citizens of the United States be swallowed up 
" and lost." Proceeding further, he argued that the power to admit new 
States referred only to territory belooging to the States when the Con- 
stitution was framed ; but whatever this right might be, it was vested in 
Congress and in the executive. In promising to admit Louisiana as a 
State, the President assumed power which coald not have been his. 

To this John Randolph replied: " The Constitution could not restrict 
" the country to particular limits, because at the time of its adoption the 
" boundary was unsettled. The power to settle disputes as to limits was 
" indispensable. It existed in the Constitution, had been exercised, and 
" involved the power of extending boundaries." He asserted that the 
right to annex Louisiana, Texas and Mexico, South America if need be, 
was involved in the right to run a doubtful boundary line, and if this 
power existed in the Government it devolved on the executive to deal 
with foreign States. 

Roger Griswold of Connecticut made an able presentation of the matter. 
But his argument is tinged throughout with a desire to save the balance 
of power to the New England States. He could not deny that the Con- 
stitution gave power to acquire territory. He agreed with Gouverneur 
Morris, who said he knew m 1788 as well as in 1803 that all North Amer- 
ica must at length be annexed. He said further that new territory and 
new subjects may undoubtedly be acquired by conquest and by purchase, 
but assumed that neither conquest nor purchase can incorporate them 
into the Union. They must remain in the condition of colonies and be 
governed accordingly ; and he contended that a treaty which j)ledged the 
nation to admit the people of Louisiana into the Union must be invalid, 
because it assumed that the President and Senate may admit at will any 
foreign power. 

His argument was listened to with respect, and had great weight, but 
was not convincing, and in the discussion which arose both Rodney and 
Nicholson presented the authority contained in the treaty-making power 
in the strongest light. Both agreed that the principle was correct, that 
the nation had the right to acquire new territory, and added that the right 
contended for must^exist somewhere, being essential to independent sov- 
ereignty, and, as such power was prohibited to the States, it was neces- 
sarily vested in the United States. Rodney argued upon the " general 



4 LOUISIANA. 

welfare " clause, holding that it included the power of increasing the 
territory of the United States, and as necessary and proper for the com 
mon defence, both of which were regarded by strict constructionists as 
the most dangerous instruments of centralization. 

At the end of the day's debate 90 Republicans supported Randolph's 
views, and 25 Federalists alone protested. 

November 2, 1803, the debate was resumed in the Senate. Senator 
Pickering clearly and definitely affirmed the right of acquisition by pur- 
chase, which must carry with it the right to govern the acquired provinces. 
But he asserted that neither the President nor Congress could incorporate 
the acquired territory into the Union. He went to the extent of arguing 
that each State must first consent before any such territory could be 
admitted to the Union of States. 

Col. Taylor, while agreeing that the United States had the right to 
acquire new territory, referred that right to the war and treaty powers. 
When it came to the question of admission of acquired territory to the 
Union, he assumed that Louisiana must be governed by the inherent 
powers of the Government, leaving it vague as to what his opinion might 
be upon the right of the President to incorporate the 3d Article in the 
treaty. 

Tracy, of Connecticut, replied to Taylor in a speech which is considered 
the best presentation on his side. It was on party grounds. He did not 
doubt the right and power to obtain territory, either by conquest or com- 
pact, and hold it, " even all Louisiana and a few times more, if you please, 
" without violating the Constitution,'" but he denied the right to admit 
the inhabitants into the Union ; to make citizens of them ; and he asserted 
in the strongest light the principle that if subsequently admitted as a 
State or States, the prior consent of all the other States must first be 
obtained, and he concluded by saying that to so admit Louisiana would 
be absorbing the Northern States and rendering them insignificant in the 
Union. 

Breckinridge, of Kentucky, replied and pointed out that if the Fed- 
eralist argument, so strongly presented by Tracy and others, was carried 
out, it would result in centralization further than it was carried by the 
treaty. The acquired territory, if held simply as a property of the 
United States, might be used as a most dangerous engine in the hands 
of the Government against the States and the peoj^le. And he further 
argued that the admission by treaty of a foreign State was therefore less 
dangerous, and therefore more constitutional, than the bare ownership of 
such territory. 

John Quincy Adams^ of Massachusetts, then a young man, believed 
that an amendment to the Constitution should be proposed to the States 
authorizing the admission of Louisiana, and he believed it would be 
adopted by every State. But he could not deny the authority of the 
General Government to acquire territory. 

Wilson Carey Nicholas closed the debate, reiterating the opinions ex- 
pressed in his letter to Jefferson, but was somewhat evasive of the points 
at issue. The treaty-making power, while indefinite, was not unlimited. 
The general limitations of the Constitution applied to it, not special 
limitations of power, and the treaty must be judged by its conformity 
with the general meaning of the comjDact. The 3d Article of the treaty 
must be considered as an engagement to incorporate the territory of 
Louisiana i»..to the Union and eventually to make it a State. Biit such 
agreement did not make a State of Louisiana, and therefore was not an 
unconstitutional exercise of the treaty-making power. The final incor- 



LOUISIANA. 5 

poration must be done according to the principles of the Constitution, 
and the States might or might not do it at their discretion. 

The result of the discussions on the treaty, in both Senate and House, 
decided but one point, and this was the right of the United States Gov- 
ernment to acquire new territory, either by conquest or purchase. The 
difference of opinion was as to the status of the newly acquired territory. 
Did it belong to the General Government or to the States? But it was 
of no great importance whether Louisiana could be held as a colony or to 
be admitted as a State, if the cession and authority of the Government 
to acquire the territory was conceded. This point was forever settled. 

Statutes. 

The first was passed upon the 31st of October, 1803, and is entitled 
"An act to enable the President of the United States to take possession 
" of the territories ceded by France to the United States by the treaty, 
" etc., and for the temporary government thereof." 

By Sec. 1 the President of the United States is authorized to take pos- 
session of and occupy the territory ceded by France to the United States 
by the treaty of April 30, 1803. He was also duly authorized for that 
purpose to employ any part of the army and navy of the United States, 
for which purj^ose he was to use funds voted for general military pur- 
poses. 

By Sec. 2 it was provided " That until the expiration of the pi'esent 
" session of Congress, unless provision for the temporary government of 
" the said territories be sooner made by Congress, all the military, civil, 
" and judicial powers exercised by the officers of the existing government 
" of the same shall be vested in such person and persons and shall be 
" exercised in such manner as the President of the United States shall 
" direct for maintaining and protecting the inhabitants of Louisiana in 
" the enjoyment of their liberty, property, and religion." (II U. S. Stats, 
at Large, 245.) 

Upon the 24th of Februar^^ 1804, Congress passed a further act to ex- 
tend to the territory, jjurchased of France by the treaty, certain laws of 
the United States, naming such acts ; first covering the acts regarding 
the levying of duties, after which follows a series of laws relative to the 
Treasury Department, the registration of ships, licensing of fishing ves- 
sels, compensation of officers, authorizing the sale of lands by marshals, 
establishment of mint regulations, etc. This act also provided for certain 
provisions and exceptions in the general working of some of the laws, 
which were necessary in view of the nature of the territory annexed. (2 
U. S. Stats, at Large, 251). 

About the 25th of February, 1804, an act was also passed extending to 
vessels in the Louisiana trade, sailing under French or Spanish registers, 
the right to register under the laws of the United States, and extending 
to them the protection of such laws. {Id. 259.) 

March 25, 1804, an act was approved dividing Louisiana into two terri- 
tories and providing for a territorial government. 

Sec. 1 provides that the lower portion of the territory should be called 
Orleans. Sec. 2, there shall be a governor to reside in said territory and 
hold office for three years, unless sooner removed by the President, and 
giving to him certain powers necessary to the government of the terri- 
tory. Sec. 3 provides him with a secretary. Sec. 4 creates a legislative 
power for the territory, vesting the same in a governor and in " thirteen 
" of the most fit and discreet persons of the territory, to be called the Leg- 
" islative Council," appointed by the President from among the holders of 



6 LOUISIANA. 

real estate. Certain restrictions were placed upon the powers of this 
body. Sec. 5 provides for a judicial power, which should be vested in the 
superior courts and in such inferior courts and justices as the local leg- 
islature might from time to time provide and establish. The remainder 
of the section provides for the powers and duties of the judges. 

Sec. 6 provides for the method of appointment of governor, secretary, 
judges, etc., by the President of the United States ; also for salaries. 

Sec. 7 extends certain criminal laws and other acts of the United States 
to the two territories. 

Sec. 8 provides for the establishment of a United States court in the 
territory and for a prosecuting attorney. 

Sec. 9 provides for the establishment of a grand jury from the inhabi- 
tants of the territory. 

Sec. 10 prohibits the importation of slaves ; providing also i:)enalties 
for the violation of such provision. 

Sec. 11 is as follows : " The laws in force in the said territory at the 
" commencement of this act, and not inconsistent with the provisions 
" thereof, shall continue in force until altered, modified, or repealed by 
" the local legislature." 

Sec. 12 provides that the remainder of the j^rovince ceded by France to 
the United States shall be called the District of Louisiana, and tliereupon 
proceeds to create the said government for such territory by extending 
to the same the executive power vested in the government of the Indiana 
Territory. 

Sec. 13 provides that the laws in force in the District of Louisiana, etc. 
shall continue until altered, modfied, or repealed by the judges of the 
Indiana Territory. The remainder of the act is taken up with previous 
pretended Spanish grants and other claims in the territory. Also pro- 
viding for settlements with Indian tribes. {Id. 283.) 

Upon the 2d of Mai'ch, 1805, a further act was passed " providing for 
" the government of the Territory of Orleans," which provides : 

Sec. 1, that the President of the United States is authorized to estab- 
lish in the Territory of Orleans a government in all respects similar (ex- 
cept as otherwise provided) to that exercised in the Mississippi Territory 
in general conformity with the ordinance of Congress made July 13, 
1787. 

Sec. 2 provides for the election of members of a general assembly, for 
the division of the territory into districts for an election, etc. 

Sec. 3 provides for a meeting of the legislature so chosen, and that 
there should be meetings each year. 

Sec. 4 continued in force all laws not inconsistent with the terms of 
this act. 

Sec. 5 prescribes that the ordinance of 1787 regulating the descent and 
distribution of estates should not extend to the Territory of Orleans. 

Sec. 6 provides for compensation of officers to be paid out of revenues 
of the Territory derived from imposts and tonnage. 

Sec. 7 provides that whenever the population of the Territory, upon a 
proper census, should amount to 60,000, they should then be authorized 
to form a constitution and State government upon the footing of the 
original States, for the purpose of conforming to the provisions of the 3d 
art. of the treaty of April 3, 1803- ; but such constitution should be re- 
publican and not inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States. 
{Id. 324.) 

On the 3d of March, 1805, an act was passed to provide a territorial 
government for the Territory of Louisiana, which is noteworthy in that 



LOUISIANA, Y 

it invests the executive power in a governor, and the legislative povper 
(sec. 3) in said governor and three judges. Jury trial is by said act also 
extended to the Territory. {Id. 331.) 

February 28, 1806, an act was passed extending the powers of sur- 
veyor-general to all public lands in the Territory of Louisiana in which 
Indian titles had been or should thereafter be extinguished. {Id. 352.) 

April 21, 180G, further act was passed relative to public lands in 
Louisiana, making particular and minute regulations relative to the same. 
{Id. 391.) 

Admission of Louisiana to Statehood. 

February 20, 1811, an act was passed to enable the people of the Ter- 
ritory of Orleans to form a constitution and State government, and for 
admission of said State into the Union, etc. 

Sec. 1 prescribe the limits of such proposed State. 

Sec. 2 provides that all free white male citizens of the United 
States of the age of twenty-one years, residing in the Territory at least a 
year, who shall have paid certain prescribed taxes, etc., should be 
entitled to vote for representatives to a constitutional convention. 

Sec. 3 provides the place of meeting ; that the constitution to be 
formed should be republican and consistent with the Constitution of the 
United States. It also prescribes certain clauses and principles which 
must be contained in the said constitution, and also that the same 
should disclaim the right to all public lands in the State, with other 
clauses. 

Sec. 4 provides that, after the adoption of such constitution, the same 
shall be transmitted to Congress, and, if not disapproved by it, that at 
the next session, after the receipt thereof, said State shall be admitted 
into the Union. (II U. S. Stat at Large, 641.) 

April 2, 1812, Congress passed an act " For the admission of the State 
" of Louisiana into the Union, and to extend the laws of the United 
" States to said State." The preamble recited the cession of Louisiana 
by the treaty of April 20, 1803, the bounds of the State, the adoption of 
a republican constitution, the transmission of the same to Congress, and 
its a]3proval ; and then Sec. 1 declares that said State is admitted into 
the UFnion on equal footing with the original States in all resj^ects what- 
soever, by the name and title of Louisiana, with the freedom of the 
Mississipiii. The act then proceeds to state how the laws of the United 
States shall be applied to the new State, makes it a judicial district, gives 
it one representative until further api^ortionment, and makes other pro- 
visions. {Id. 701.) 

The act of April 14, 1812, simply enlarges the limits of the State. 

II. 

Florida. 
With some fluctuations in ownership, extent of territory and govern- 
ment, Florida at the beginning of the century belonged to Spain ; but 
the United States, very soon after the Revolution, looked with longing 
eyes a,t the territoiy, and desired to have it annexed to the United 
States. In the disturbed conditions in Europe it seemed uncertain as to 
where the territory would finally go, and during the first decade of the 
century extreme solicitude was felt on the part of the Government of the 
United States as to what might become of it, and an act was passed 
January 15, 1811, authorizing the President, under certain contingencies, 
to take possession of the country south of Georgia and Mississippi. (II 
U. S. Stat, at L. 471-2.) 



8 FLORIDA. 

January 15th, same year, a resolution was adopted in Congress, that in 
view of the peculiar situation of Spain and her American provinces, and 
the importance to the United States of the countries upon her south 
border, it could not look " without seriovis inquietude and see any portion 
of the territory fall into possession of a foreign power, and that due 
regard to the safety of the United States might require its temporary 
occupation subject to further negotiations." (U. S. Stat, at Large, 666, 
and III id. 471.) 

What the United States so earnestly desired with regard to the terri- 
tory of Florida was acquired by the treaty of 1819, which was concluded 
in February following. The ratifications were finally exchanged Feb- 
ruary 22, 1821. The treaty is entitled " Treaty of amity, settlement, and 
limits." The preamble recites the determination and desire on the part 
of the two governments to consolidate on the permanent basis of friend- 
ship and good understanding. 

In Art. 2 his Catholic Majesty cedes to the United States all territories 
which belong to him situated east of the Mississippi, known by the name 
of East and West Florida, the adjacent islands dej^endent on said 
provinces, all public lots, squares, fortifications, etc., not private prop- 
erty, and all archives and public documents relating directly to the prop- 
erty and sovereignty of the provinces, which were to be left in the hands 
of the commissioners of the United States duly authorized. 

Art. 3 concludes a new boundary between Spanish and American pos- 
sessions west of the Mississippi, beginning on the Gulf of Mexico at the 
mouth of the Sabine, thence running on the bank of that river to the 
thirty-second degree of north latitude, and so on, covering much of the 
territory now included in the Indian Territory, part of Kansas and Colo- 
rada to the 42nd parallel of north latitude ; thence on said parallel to the 
" South Sea," all of the islands on the Sabine, Red, and Arkansas rivers 
were given to the United States. 

Art. 5 secures to the inhabitants of the ceded territories the free exer- 
cise of their religion, etc. 

Art. 6 is as nearly as may be a copy of Art. Ill of the French treaty 
ceding Louisiana, and reads as follows : 

" The inhabitants of the territories which his Catholic Majesty cedes to 
" the United States by this treaty shall be incorporated in the Union of 
" the United States as soon as may be consistent with the principles of the 
" Federal Constitution, and admitted to the enjoyment of all the privileges, 
" rights, and immunities of the citizens of the United States " 

Art. 8 confirms certain Spanish grants of lands, but expressly nullifies 
any such grants made subsequent to the 21th of January, 1818, when the 
first proposition to cede the territory was made by the King of Spain. 

Art. 9 renounces certain claims by citizens of the United States and of 
Spain against the opposite respective governments. 

Art. 11 provides for satisfaction by the United States of certain claims 
of its citizens to the extent of $5,000,000. (VIII U. S. St. at L 251.) 

The action of Spain was undoubtedly precipitated by the action of 
General Andrew Jackson, who, upon the pretext of pursuing to their 
lairs the Indians, took possession of nearly all of northern Florida in 1818. 
March 3, 1819, "An act to authorize the President of the United States 
" to take possession of East and West Florida and establish a temporary 
" government therein " was passed, which authorized the President to 
take possession of East and West Florida and all appurtenances, and to 
remove therefrom the officers and soldiers of Spain in accordance with 
the terms of treaty providing for the cession of said territory, executed 



FLORIDA. 9 

the 22d of February, 1819; aud the President was authorized to use the 
forces of the United States for that purpose, and to maintain the author- 
ity of the United States laws therein. 

The act also provided for extending to Florida the laws of the United 
States, and also that unless Congress provide for the temporary govern- 
ment of the territory, all of the civil, military, and judicial powers exer- 
cised by officers of the existing government of said territory shall be 
vested in such persons and be exercised in such manner as the President 
of the United States shall direct for maintaining the free enjoyment of 
religion, liberty, aud propert}^ by the inhabitants of such territory. 

Sec. 4 provides that the act should take effect and be in force when- 
ever the said treaty should have been ratified by the King of Spain and 
he should be ready to surrender said territory to the United States. (Ill 
Stat, at L. 523.) 

Although the treaty had been duly signed by the plenipotentiaries in 
Washington, the King of Spain constantly deferred and delayed the rati- 
fication of the treaty until there was serious danger of a rupture between 
the two governments, but upon the protestation of the emissaries of the 
United States at times in Madrid, and at times to the Spanish emissary 
in Washington, such ratification was finally given, and in 1821, March 
3d, an act was passed by Congress for carrying into execution said 
treaty, referring back to the law of 1819. 

By it the President was authorized to take possession of and. occupy 
the territories of East and West Florida, and to exercise the powers named 
in said act, extending also to Florida the laws of the United States, with 
certain modifications required by the treaty of cession. (Ill id. 637.) 

Still there was delay in transferring the territory to the United States 
by Spain. An act had been passed reducing the military establishment, 
which had the effect of throwing out General Jackson. He was there- 
upon appointed governor of the new territory under the large but vague 
powers given to the President by the act of Congress. He received sev- 
eral commissions for various purposes, and to act as governor and to 
carry the treaty into full effect. Possession was finally taken in East 
Florida on the 10th of July, and by General Jackson personally at Pensa- 
cola, in West Florida, upon the ITtli of the same month. There was 
some difficult}^ in getting possessioii of the archives, but by the summary 
arrest of the Spanish governor, Jackson procured all the necessary 
papers. 

In 1822, March 30th, an act was passed to establish a Territorial gov- 
ernment in Florida. By it East and West Florida were united into one 
Territory, to be called Florida. 

Sec. 2 provides that the executive power shall be vested in a governor, 
to hold office for three years, unless removed. 

Sec. 3 provides for a secretary of the Territory, with certain powers. 

Sec. 4, that in case of the absence of the governor, the secretary should 
perform his duties. 

Sec. 5 vested the legislative power in a governor and in thirteen fit and 
discreet persons of the Territor}^ to be called the legislative council, to 
be appointed by the President of the United States. They might enact 
such laws and regulations for the government of the Territory as should 
not be inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States, 
and amend and modify existing law. Sessions wei"e provided for each 
year, to be not longer than two months. 

Sec. provides for the judicial power, to consist of two superior courts, 
and such inferior courts as the legislature should appoint. 



10 FLORIDA. 

Sec. 7, for the jurisdictiou of courts. 

Sec. 8, for the appointment of Territorial officers by the President, by 
and witb^the advice and consent of the Senate. 

Sec. 9 extends to the Territory the provisions of certain acts of the 
United States. 

Sec. 13, that the laws of the Territory not inconsistent with the pro- 
visions of this act shall continue to be in full force and effect until duly 
modified and repealed. 

Sec. 14 entitles the Territory to one delegate in Congress. (Ill U. S. , 
Stat, at L. 654.) 

May 7, 1822, an act was passed to relieve the people of Florida from 
the obligation of certain ordinances, imposed by Jackson while governor 
of the Territory, with reference to naturalization. {Id. 685.) 

March 3, 1823, an act was passed amending the law of 1822 preparing 
for a Territorial government, making some alterations in the form {id. 
750), and, at the same time, an act was passed relative to settlement of 
claims and titles to land in the Territory. {Id. 754.) 

May 15, 1825, another act was passed amending the law for Territorial 
government with regard to the courts, jurisdiction, form of procedure, 
etc.; also to provide more specifically for the election of the Territorial 
council having legislative authority. (IV U. S. Stat, at L. 164.) 

During this time many acts were passed by Congress modifying or 
annulling acts of the Territorial legislature, and supervising lands, etc., 
in the Territory, which are to be found chiefly in Vol. IV of the U. S. Stat- 
utes, and which are interesting as showing the extent to which Congress 
may interfere in Territorial government. 

Owing to troubles with the Indians, and the swampy, isolated charac- 
ter of the Territory, the population increased but slowly, and many years 
elapsed before Florida was finally admitted as a State. 

Further laws were enacted March 3, 1845, to carry into full effect the 
law of admission, to apply to all parts of the State the laws of the United 
States, and provide for certain U. S. officers, etc. (V U. S. Stat, at L. 
788-9.) 

Admission of Florida to Statehood. 

Upon the 3d of March, 1845, an act was passed for the admission of 
both Florida and Iowa into the Union. The preamble recites the enact- 
ment of a State constitution by each ; that the same were found to be 
duly republican, and the several requests for admission into the Union ; 
and Sec. 1 thereupon declares that the States of Iowa and Florida be, and 
the same are hereby, declared to be States of the United States of America. 

Sec. 5 describes the State of Florida as embracing the territories of 
East and West Florida, duly ceded to the United States by the above 
treaty. 

Sec. 6 provides that each of said States shall have one representative 
in Congress. 

Sec. 7 provides that neither shall interfere with the primary disposal of 
public lauds, nor levy taxes thereupon. -^ (V U. S. Stat. at;L. 742.) 

Judicial Decisions on Annexation. 
The legislative and executive departments of the United States Gov- 
ernment having by their action unquestionably held that the annexation 
of foreign territory was within the constitutional powers of the 
Government, it only remained for ° the judicial branch to jDass'upon the 
subject. This was clearly done in the case of the American Insurance 
Company et al. v. David Canter, claimant, reported in 1 Peters, 511. 
(See also a digest reviewing the cases in " Thayer's cases on Constitu- 



FLORIDA. 11 

" tional Law," part 1, p. 350.) The opinion of the court in Canter's case 
was dehvered by the great Chief Justice Marshall. The proceeding 
arose under acts passed by the Territorial legislature of Florida, and 
" was taken to the Supreme Court upon the direct question of the con- 
" stitutionality of these acts, which involved the constitutionality of the 
"■ annexation of that territory." The court says, * * * "If it be ceded 
" by the treaty * * * the ceded territory becomes a part of the nation 
" to which it is annexed, either on terms stipulated in the treaty of cession, 
" or on such as its new master shall impose. On such transfer of territory 
" it has never been held that the relations of the inhabitants with each 
" other undergo any change." * * * The court then proceeds to review 
the sixth article of the treaty of the 2d of February, 1819, with regard 
to the inhabitants of the territory, — their being incorporated into the 
Union, etc. ; and it goes on to say : " This treaty is the law of the land and 
" admits the inhabitants of Florida to the enjoyment of the privileges, 
" rights, and immunities of the citizens of the United States. It is un- 
" necessary to inquire whether this is not their condition independent of 
" stipulation. They do not, however, participate in political power ; they 
" do not share in the Government until Florida shall have become a State. 
" In the meantime Florida continues to be a territory of the United States, 
" governed by virtue of that clause in the Constitution which empowers 
" Congress to make all needful rules and regulations respecting the terri- 
" tory or other property belonging to the United States."' 

The right to govern may be the inevitable consequence of the right to 
acquire territory. Whichever may be the course where the power is de- 
rived, the possession of it is unquestioned. ■^ 

This decision clearly indieates the opinion of the Supreme Court upon 
the question of constitutionality, and it has been amply sustained by sub- 
sequent decisions. 

III. 
Texas. 

The case of Texas presents still another instance of the annexation of 
a foreign territory to the United States. But it diflers from the cases of 
Louisiana and Florida in the important fact that Texas was a unit, an en- 
tire country, which desired annexation to the United States, in which the 
inhabitants controlled the destinies of the State. It is true that claims 
were made to the territory as forming part of the Louisiana cession ; but 
if any such claim had an existence in fact, it was set at rest by the treaty 
of cession of Florida, which definitely fixed the boundaries of the United 
States at the Sabine river, thereby admitting, without question, the right 
of Spain to the entire Texas territory. (Ill Schouler, 96 U. S. Hist.) 

In some respects the case of Texas is not unlike that of the Hawaiian 
Islands, with regard to its settlement and civilization ; for Americans em- 
igrated thence, and became the dominant and powerful portion of the 
population, forming the State and controlling its fate. The republic was 
established in October, 1836, and in less than a year an application was 
made for annexation to the United States, which was then declined. The 
Northern States looked at it as an attempt to spread the slave power. 

It does not concern this digest to go into the matter of how Texas ob- 
tained her independence from Mexico, or to review the causes of the 
Mexican war, but it is a part of the history of the country that Mexico 

' See also Fleming v. Page, 9 How. 614 ; Scott v. Sanford, 19 How. 393 ; Mormon 
Church «. U. S., 136 U. S. 42. 

'^ See Am. lus. Co. v. Canter, 1 Pet. 542; Cross v. Harrison, 16 How. 164; Nat. 
Bank v. Yankton, 101 U. S. 129 ; Mormon Church v. U. S. 136 U. S. 42 ; Jones v. 
U. S., 137 U. S. 202; Railway v. McGlinn, 114 U. S. 546. 



12 TEXAS. 

had not admitted the independence of Texas as an autonomous govern- 
ment when this war broke out. Indeed, it was caused largely by the con- 
duct of the United States authorities and the Texans regarding annexa- 
tion to the United States. (IV Schouler's U. S. Hist. 247, 250-554 ; VIII 
H. H. Bancroft, Chap. 7, Debates of Congress, 1836. See also IV Schouler, 
U. S. Hist. 444-50.) 

In the discussions in Congress which arose over the question of annex- 
ation, it is noteworthy that the Whigs argued that it was unconstitu- 
tional for Congress to annex a foreign republic, but after the precedents 
of Louisiana and Florida it was held that such a scruple had no weight, 
and the constitutional right to annex foreign territory was conceded as a 
thoroughly established precedent of the country. The real objection, 
which was not named, was the unavoidable extension of the slave power 
by such annexation. (IV Schouler, U. S. Hist. 482.) Seward voiced that 
sentiment and predicted the nullification and disunion which must inevit- 
ably follow. (Seward's Life, p. 727.) 

A treaty of annexation was entered into between the two governments, 
but it failed of ratification in the U. S. Senate, not getting the requisite 
two thirds majority. But it is a matter of history that its defeat arose, 
not upon any question of authority or of unconstitutionality, but on 
account of the slave question. 

In his annual message to Congress in December, 1844, President Tyler 
argued that Texas should be annexed to the American Union at once. 

He referred to the fact that a proposed treaty of annexation had been 
negatived, and therefore suggested that a resolution should be passed by 
Congress for the purj^ose of accomplishing that which had not been ob- 
tained by treaty. It appears hj reference to the Congressional Globe of 
December, 1843, p. 652, that the vote stood 16 for ratification with 35 
against. 

The treaty is not published nor the proceedings in executive session, 
but on June 10, 1844, Mr. Benton, in his motion for leave to introduce a 
bill for the annexation of Texas, spoke of the treaty now being out of the 
way ; that he should ask leave to introduce a bill for that purpose, claim- 
ing that only Congress had a right to annex territory and not the Presi- 
dent. He claimed that, by the Constitution, Congress alone could admit 
States. His speech is interesting as setting forth the course of proceed- 
ings had with regard to Florida. The proposed bill, which did not 
finally pass, proposed (1) to authorize the President to open negotiations 
with Mexico and Texas, with the former because that it had not recognized 
the independence of Texas, although the war with Texas was practically 
over; (2) to get the consent of the people of Texas by a vote to be taken 
for that purpose. The 6th section of the bill provided for obtaining the 
assent of the Republic of Mexico, but upon the 13th of June of that year 
the bill was tabled by a vote of 25 to 20. (See Congressional Globe, p. 
674.) The debates upon this bill, takcA with the provisions of the jDro- 
posed measure, are interesting and of some value as showing that even 
at that date Congress did not regard it as necessary to take a vote of the 
people of the country proposed to be annexed, and the joint resolution 
which was finally adopted in 1845 made no provision for any such refer- 
endum. 

Without entering into the various conventions and communications be- 
tween the United States and Texan authorities, the act which finally 
brought about the annexation of Texas was the passage by the United 
States Congress, after considerable discussion and some amendment, of 
a joint resolution upon the 25th of February, 1845, which was signed by 



TEXAS. 13 

President Tyler upon the 1st day of March that year — -it being practically 
his last act before retiring. Its main points are as follows : 

'■'• Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
" States of America in Co?igress assembled, That Congress doth consent 
" that the territory properly included within and rightfully belonging to 
" the Republic of Texas may be erected into a new State, to be called the 
" State of Texas, with a republican form of government, to be adopted 
" by the people of said republic by deputies in convention assembled, 
•' with the consent of the existing government, in order that the same 
" may be admitted as one of the States of the Union. 

^'And be it further Resolved, That the foregoing consent of Congress is 
" given upon the following conditions, and with the following guarantees, 
" to wit : 

'•'■First. Said State to be formed subject to the adjustment by this 
'• Government of all questions of boundary that may arise with other 
" governments ; and the constitution thereof, with the proper evidence of 
" its adoption by the people of said Republic of Texas, shall be trans- 
" mitted to the President of the United States, to be laid before Congress 
" for its final action on or before the 1st day of January, 1846. 

" Second. Said State when admitted into the Union after ceding to the 
" United States the public edifices * * * ports and harbors * * * 
" and all other property * * * belonging to said Republic of Texas ; 
" shall retain all the public funds, debts, taxes, and dues of every kind 
" which may belong to or be due and owing said republic ; and shall also 
" retain all the vacant and luiappropriated lands lying within its limits, 
" to be applied to the payment of the debts and liabilities to be disposed 
"■ of as said State may direct. But in no event are said debts and liabil- 
" ities to become a charge upon the Government of the United States. 

^^ Third. New States of convenient size, not exceeding four in number, 
" in addition to the said State of Texas, and having sufficient population, 
" may hereaftei', by the consent of said State, be formed out of the terri- 
" tory thereof, which shall be entitled to admission under the provisions 
" of the Federal Conititution * * * (Referring to the slavery ques- 
" tion.) * * * 

'■'■And be it further Resolved, That if the President of the United States 
'' shall in his judgment and discretion deem it most advisable, instead of 
" proceeding to submit the foregoing resolution to the Republic of 
" Texas, as an overture upon the part of the United States for admission, 
'' to negotiate with that republic ; then, 

"•_Z>e it Resolved, That a State, to be formed out of the present Re- 
" public of Texas, with suitable extent and boundaries, and with two 
" representatives in Congress, until the next apj)ortionment of representa- 
" tion, shall be admitted into the Union, by virtue of this act, on an 
" equal footing with existing States, as soon as the terms and conditions 
" of such admission and the cession of the remaining Texan territory to 
" the United States shall be agreed upon by the governments of Texas and 
" the United States * * * (appropriation for expenses) * * * to 
" agree upon the terms of said admission and cession, either by treaty, to 
" be submitted to the Senate, or by articles to be submitted to the two 
" houses of Congress, as the President may direct." (V U. S. Stat, at 
L. 797.) 

In the discussion which arose upon the resolution, it was contended 
that there was but one course by which annexation could be procured — 
that of a treaty ; but it was admitted that a joint resolution authorizing 
the admission of Texas as a State was within the powers of Congress, 



14 TEXAS. 

and that whatever may have been the doubt prior to that time, the right 
of Congress to do so was clearly established. 

It is very probable that the form of a joint resolution was taken to 
authorize the annexation of Texas, as its passage through either house 
of Congress required only a majority, and not two-thirds. In the Senate 
the vote stood 27 to 25, while in the House it stood 120 to 98, 112 of the 
majority being Democrats ; and a like proportion of the majority is true 
in regard to the Senate vote (4 Schuyler, 483-4, and 67 Miles' Debates of 
Congress, 350). 

(An interesting account of events that led up to the annexation of 
Texas and the Mexican war may be found in the 1st chapter of the His- 
tory of the Mexican War by General C. M. Wilcox.) 

In Texas the legislature met upon the 16th of June, and considerec^ the 
matter of annexation. Two offers confronted the republic — from Mexico 
a treaty of peace on terms of separate independence, it being insisted 
upon that there should be no annexation to the United States ; from the 
United States the proposition of annexation under and in accordance with 
the terms of the joint resolution. The Mexican offer was unanimously 
rejected, while that of the United States was unanimously accepted. 
Three months later a constitution to accord with the requirements of the 
joint resolution of the United States was submitted to the people, and 
was adopted by a very large majority, showing clearly the sentiment in 
Texas. (4 Schuyler, U. S. Hist. 520.) 

Shortly after, this constitution, having been submitted to the Congress 
of the United States, which began its session early in December, 1845, 
was approved by the said Congress, and on the 29th of December a joint 
resolution for the admission of the State of Texas into the Union was 
adopted. The preamble of the resolution declares that " Whereas the 
" Congress of the United States, by a joint resolution approved March 1, 
" 1845, did consent that the territory properly included within and right- 
" fully belonging to the Republic of Texas might be erected into a new 
" State, to be called the State of Texas," etc. (recites the adoption of 
the constitution, its transmission to the President, and appi'oval) ; there- 
fore it was resolved : 

Sec. 1. " That the State of Texas shall be one, and is hereby declared 
" to be one, of the United States of America, and admitted into the Union 
" on an equal footing with the original States in all respects whatever." 

Sec. 2. Admits two representatives for the State in Congress. (IX U. 
S. Stat, at L. 108.) 

Upon the same day the President approved " An act to extend the 
" laws of the United States over the State of Texas, and for other pur- 
" poses." 

Sec. 1 declared : " That all the laws of the United States are hereby 
" declared to extend to and over, and to have full force and effect within, 
" the State of Texas, admitted at the present session of Congress into 
" the Confederacy and Union of the United States." 

Sec. 2 constitutes Texas a judicial district, and provides for terms of 
court, jurisdiction, etc. {Id. 1.) 

Another act, approved 31st of December, '45, erects the State of Texas 
into a collection district, names a port of entry, provides for a collector, 
surveyors, etc. {Id. 2.) 

Appropriate legislation thereafter from time to time applied the various 
laws of the United States to Texas for the purpose of making it in all 
respects an integral part of the Union, and subject to all the laws and 
regulations of the country. It is not necessary to quote at length the 



TEXAS. 15 

subsequent proceedings between the United States and Texas, which are 
noted in various acts of Congress, except to say that whereas it was pro- 
vided in the first instance that Texas should pay its own debt, it was 
afterwards practically paid by the United States Government by the issue 
of $10,000,000 in bonds of the United States to Texas, upon the settle- 
ment of the claims of said State to territory now covered by New Mexico 
and Arizona. (IX U. S. Stat, at L. 446.) The act making such provision 
also establishes the Territory of New Mexico. See also proclamatioo of 
the President respecting boundaries. (IX id. 1005.) 

The action of the United States and Texas with regard to annexation 
naturally provoked the Mexican people and brought about the war; 
although the immediate cause thereof was the occupation by the United 
States troops of the territory south and w^est of the Neuces river, which 
Mexico claimed to be the proper boundary of Texas, while the Texans, 
supported by the United States Government, claimed the Rio Grande. 
The war was ended by the treaty concluded May 30, 1848, which was 
duly proclaimed the 4th of July following. 

In Article 6 of the treaty a division line is provided for between Mexico 
and the United States ; and in Article 12 the United States " agrees to 
" pay to Mexico the sum of $15,000,000 for the extension of the bounda- 
" riesof the United States ;" also agreed to pay certain claims of American 
citizens against Mexico. (IX U. S. Stat, at L. 922.) 

This treaty, which was duly ratified, as required by the Constitution of 
the United States, is still another admission of the right^of the United 
States to acquire foreign territory, for by it a very large addition was 
made to the limits of the country, covering many hundred thousands of 
square miles, extending on the Pacific coast from the confines of Lower 
California to the 42d parallel of north latitude, thence to the source of 
the Arkansas river in the Rocky Mountains. 

IV. 

Alaska. 

After the close of the civil war secret negotiations were entered into 
between Russia and the United States for the purchase and cession of the 
territory called Russian America or Alaska, and upon the 30th of March, 
1867, a treaty of purchase and cession was concluded, which was ratified 
and proclaimed at Washington upon the 20th of June following. This 
treaty will be found on p. 939 in the volume of the United States Treaties 
and Conventions. The proclamation thereof by the President of the 
United States appears upon p. 539, Vol. 15, U. S. Stat, at Large. 

Article I contains an agreement on the part of Russia to cede^^to the 
United States all Russian territory upon the continent of America and 
adjacent islands ; thereupon setting forth the geographic limits. 

Article II makes an express conveyance of public lands, fortifications, 
etc., and agrees that all documents and archives relative thereto shall be 
delivered to the United States authorities. 

Article III provides that such inhabitants of the ceded territory as 
desire might return to Russia within three years, reserving their Russian 
allegiance, but that " if they should prefer to remain in the ceded terri- 
" tory, they, with the exception of uncivilized native tribes, shall be 
" admitted to the enjoyment of all the rights, advantages, and immunities 
" of citizens of the United States, and shall be maintained and protected 
" in the free enjoyment of their liberty, property, and i-eligiou. The unciv- 
" ilized tribes shall be subject to such laws and regulations as the United 



16 ALASKA. 

" States may from time to time adopt in regard to aboriginal tribes of 
" tliat country." 

Article IV provides for the appointment of agents on the part of each 
Government to proceed to Alaska for the purpose of transferring the pos- 
session, etc. 

Article VI provides for the payment by the United States to Russia of 
$7,200,000, as the price of the ceded territory. 

There were only two votes against ratification, 37 voting in the affirma- 
tive. 

For the proceedings upon the ratification of the treaty annexing Alaska, 
see 15 Executive Journal (1867), p. 675-6. 

Note. 

The decision of Congress in 1803 on the acquisition of Louisiana, which 
forever settled the constitutional authority of the United States as a Gov- 
ernment to acquire foreign territory, only followed in the footsteps of the 
statesmen of 1787. who accejDted the cession of the Northwest Territory, 
for the Articles of Confederation were silent upon the subject, as was the 
subsequently adopted Constitution. The principle was established, and 
must forever remain a part of the American system, that, although not in 
terms delegated, the power of such acquisition impliedly belonged to the 
sovereign. 

This implied power covers the authority to deal with the general ter- 
ritory of the United States ; not only to acquire, but to cede. By treaties 
in 1812 Great Britain received a portion of Maine, and in 1816 a vast ter- 
ritory' in the Northwest and on the shores of the Pacific. (See Miller on 
the Constitution, pp. 128-131.) 

The authority of the United States to acquire foreign territory was 
again affirmed by the Supreme Court in the recent case of Mormon Church 
V. U. S., 136 U. S. 1. 

At page 12 the court says : 

" The power to acquire territory * * * ig derived from the treaty- 
" making power and the power to carry on war. The incidents of these 
" powers are those of national sovereignty, and belong to all independent 
" governments. The power to make acquisitions of territory by conquest, 
" by treaty, and by cession is an incident of national sovereignty. * * * 
" The acquired territory becomes subject to such conditions as the Gov- 
" ernment in its different negotiations had seen fit to accept in relation 
" to the rights of the people then inhabiting those territories." 

The ojiinion then goes on relative to powers of the United States in 
governing the territory, and in the dissenting opinion in those cases de- 
livered by Chief Justice Fuller it is said : 

" Doubtless territory may be acquired by the direct action of Congress, 
" as in the annexation of Texas; by treaty, as in the annexation of Lou- 
" isiana, or, as in the case of California, by conquest, and afterwards by 
" treaty ; but the power to legislate over territories is granted in so many 
'' words by the Constitution." 

Sections 5570-8, U. S. Rev. Statutes, give authority to the President 
of the United States to declare that guano islands and similar property, 
wherever the same may be, shall under certain circumstances appertain 
to the United States. 

Jones V. United States, 137 U. S. 202, holds this statute to be constitu- 
tional, and that the action of the President fixes the status of such 
islands, although detached from the continent. This was decided by the 
case, although the particular point at issue appears to have been the 
constitutionality of the statute extending the criminal jurisdiction of the 
United States to such detached possessions. 




I°!'=o^Gflir^ 




°°" 527 458 



